A Novel Microporous Polyurethane Blood Conduit: Biocompatibility Assessment of the UTA Arterial Prosthesis by an Organo-typic Culture Technique

References

• Lelah M D, Cooper S L. Polyurethanes in Medicine. CRC Press Inc, Boca Raton, Florida 1986
   Google Scholar
• Wilkes G L, Samuels S C. Porous segmented polyurethanes: possible candidates as biomaterials. J Biomed Mat Res 1973; 7: 541–554
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leidner J, Wong E WC, MacGregor D C, Wilson G J. A novel process for the manufacturing of porous grafts: process description and product evaluation. J Biomed Mat Res 1983; 17: 229–247
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kowligi R R, Von Maltzahn W W, Eberhart R C. Small diameter vascular grafts: physical property evaluation. Proceedings of the Fifth Southern Biomedical Engineering Conference, S Subrata. Pergamon Press, Elmsford, NY 1986; 125–129
   Google Scholar
• Martz H, Beaudoin G, Paynter R, King M, Marceau D, Guidoin R. Physicochemical characterization of a hydrophilic microporous polyurethane vascular graft. J Biomed Mat Res 1987; 21: 399–412
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• How T V, Clarke R M. The elastic properties of a polyurethane arterial prosthesis. J Biomechanics 1984; 17: 597–608
   Google Scholar
• Guidoin R, Sigot M, King M, Sigot-Luizard M R. Biocompatibility of the Vascugraft: evaluation of a novel polyester urethane vascular substitute by an organo-typic culture technique. Biomaterials 1992; 13: 281–288
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sigot-Luizard M F, Lanfranchi M, Duval J L, et al. The cytocompatibility of compound polyester-protein surfaces using an in vitro technique. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol 1986; 22: 234–240
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilding D K, Reed A M, Askill I N, Poriana S. Mitrathane, a new polyether urethane urea for critical medical applications. Trans Amer Soc Artif Intern Org 1984; 30: 571–576
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Marois Y, Guidoin R, Boyer D, Assayed F, Doillon C J, Paynter R, Marois M. In vivo evaluation of hydrophobic and fibrillar microporous polyurethane urea graft. Biomaterials 1989; 10: 521–531
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qayumi A K, Jamieson W RE, Lyster D M, et al. Evaluation of new polyurethane Mitrathane grafts in arterial substitution. Res in Surg 1989; 1: 123–130
   Google Scholar
• Annis D, Bornat A, Edwards R U, Higham A, Loveday B, Wilson J. An elastomeric vascular prosthesis. Trans Amer Soc Artif Intern Org 1978; 24: 209–214
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Charara J, Guidoin R, Rao T J, . Expanded PTFE prostheses as substitutes in the abdominal aorta of dogs: a comparative study of eleven different grafts. High Performance Biomaterials: A Comprehensive Guide to Medical/Pharmaceutical Applications, M. Szycher, et al. Technomic Publishing Co. Inc, Lancaster, PA 1991; 287–311
   Google Scholar
• Sigot-Luizard M F. Mise au point d'un modèle d'évaluation quantitative de la cytocompatibilité des biomatériaux en culture organo-typique. Paris mars 3–4, 1988, Ste Française de Pharmaco-Toxicologie Cellulaire, Colloque “Méthodes in vitro en pharmacotoxicologie”
   Google Scholar
• Duval J L, Letort M, Sigot-Luizard M F. Comparative assessment of cell/substratum static adhesion using an in vitro organ culture method and computerized analysis system. Biomaterials 1988; 9: 155–161
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gogolewski D K, Pennings A J, Lommen E. Growth of a neoartery induced by a biodegradable polymeric vascular prosthesis. Makromol Chem (Rapid Comm.) 1983; 4: 213–218
   Google Scholar
• Lannerstad O, Bjorck C G, Dougan P, Ericsson B F, Nilsson B, Bergqvist D. The acute thrombogenicity of a compliant polyurethane arterial graft compared with autologous vein. Acta Chir Scand 1986; 152: 187–190
   Google Scholar
• Shibuta R, Tanaka M, Sisido M, Imanishi Y. Synthesis of novel polyaminoetherurethaneureas and development of antithrombogenic material by their chemical modification. J Biomed Mater Res 1986; 20: 971–987
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jansen B, Ellinghorst G. Modification of polyetherurethane for biomedical application by radiation-induced grafting. I. Grafting procedure, determination of mechanical properties, and chemical modification of grafted films. J Biomed Mater Res 1985; 19: 1085–1099
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hess F, Jerusalem C, Braun B. A fibrous polyurethane microvascular prosthesis. Morphological evaluation of the neo-intima. J Cardiovasc Surg 1983; 24: 509–515
   Google Scholar
• Hess P, Jerusalem C, Braun B. The endothelialization process of a fibrous polyurethane microvascular prosthesis after implantation in the abdominal aorta of the rat. J Cardiovasc Surg 1983; 24: 516–524
   Google Scholar
• Braun B, Grande P U, Lehnhardt F J, Jerusalem C, Hess F. Herstellung un tierexperimentelle Untersuchung einer kleinlumigen mikroporosen Polyurethan-Gefassprothese. Vasa J Vasc Dis Suppl 1988; 22: 5–38
   Google Scholar
• Boyd K L, Schmidt S, Pippert T R, Hite S A, Sharp W V. The effects of pore size and endothelial cell seeding upon the performance of small-diameter ePTFE vascular grafts under controlled flow conditions. J Biomed Mat Res 1988; 22: 163–177
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Absolom D R, Howthorn L A, Chang G. Endothelialization of polymer surfaces. J Biomed Mat Res 1988; 22: 271–285
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martz H, Paynter R, Forest J C, Downs A, Guidoin R. Microporous hydrophilic polyurethane vascular grafts as substitutes in the abdominal aorta of dogs. Biomaterials 1987; 8: 3–11
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martz H, Paynter R, Ben Slimane S, et al. Hydrophilic microporous polyurethane versus expanded PTFE grafts as substitutes in the carotid arteries of dogs. A limited study. J Biomed Mat Res 1988; 22: 63–69
   Google Scholar
• Teijeira F J, Lamoureux G, Tétreault J P, et al. Hydrophilic polyurethane versus autologous femoral vein as substitutes in the femoral arteries of dogs: quantification of platelets and fibrin deposits. Biomaterials 1989; 10: 80–84
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Veith F J, Moss C M, Fell S C. Comparison of expanded polytetrafluoroethylene and autologous saphenous vein grafts in high risk arterial reconstruction for limb salvage. Surg Cyn Obstel 1978; 147: 749–752
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Camilleri J P, Phat V N, Bruneval P, et al. Surface healing and histologic maturation of patent polytetrafluoroethylene grafts implanted in patients for up to 60 months. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1985; 109: 833–837
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar